Skip to main content

About your Search

20130216
20130224
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
of religion is understood to be a completely private matter. in the statement by mendelssohn, in connection with france, he said to be a citizen in the streets but a jew at home, but that is not the message you get from the stable of kosher food in philadelphia. it is ok to be a jew in public, too. it is not a matter of expressing to the private. the spirit of freedom is perhaps unique to the united states in the world, but even here, even with that kind of sounding, and even with the words of the first amendment to express that, things have not always been so happy, and especially not always so happy for minorities in america. he was not then chief justice but the man who was going to become chief justice of the supreme court fought on the convention to exclude roman catholics. it was a big fight. he was defeated alternately, -- alternately, but that was an attempt, and it was not long after, and that was a time when catholics constituted less than 1% of the population of the united states and were no threat out all. as larger numbers of roman catholics came to these shores, especially fro
not arguing for morality, from religion, or from tradition. none of my arguments presuppose anything about the moral status of gay relationships. there are lots of valuable relationships that do not get recognized as marriage by anybody. that cannot be the decisive factor. they do not rely on any particular religious tradition. if they did, it would still leave something to be desired because something i will defend today has been common to religions across time and many cultures. we would still want to ask the question of what common feature was motivating those theologies rather than the other way around. and i am not arguing that because it has always been this way it always should be. another thing is that my argument cannot be answered by appeals to equality. we usually think that this is the right response when we think of the marriage debate as a debate about whether to expand or restrict a pool of people eligible for marriage. it is true that from that perspective it looks like marriage is a good thing and should be available on an equal basis. i think that this debate is actually
of that is that i am not arguing for morality, from religion, or from tradition. none of my arguments presuppose anything about the moral status of gay relationships. there are lots of valuable relationships that do not get recognized as marriage by anybody. that cannot be the decisive factor. they do not rely on any particular religious tradition. if they did, it would still leave something to be desired because something i will defend today has been common to religions across time and many cultures. we would still want to ask the question of what common feature was motivating those theologies rather than the other way around. and i am not arguing that because it has always been this way it always should be. another thing is that my argument cannot be answered by appeals to equality. we usually think that this is the right response when we think of the marriage debate as a debate about whether to expand or restrict a pool of people elible for marriage. it is true that from that perspective it looks like marriage is a good thing and should be available on an equa basis. i think that this debate
study law or medicine or religion. that was about all. thomas jefferson had a vision. he believed the american people needed a public place to learn the diversity of disciplines, studies of science and at space, 4, form a common philosophy. -- flora, fauna, philosophy. he built this university in the image of 20 called the illimitable freedom of the human mind. today those of you will study here and teach here along with the taxpayers contributors, and parents who believe in your potential, you are all investing in mr. jefferson's vision. think for a moment about what that means. why do you spend many days and the dollars it takes to earn an education here or anywhere? why did jefferson what this institution to remain public and accessible, not just to virginians but as a destination from everywhere? i know that he was not thinking just about your getting a degree and a job. it was about something more. jefferson believed we could not be a strong country without investing in the kind of education that empowers us to be good citizens. that is why founding this university is among t
fellow religion, i want our people out of there. that is not right. i come over to our country and try to kill us. we need to stay over there and fight for our freedom. host: you bring up interesting points. basic idea we have in this country is that we get into wars, but we very rapidly lose the ability to support those wars, political perspective. we saw what happened in vietnam. if desert storm last longer, we would have seen the same thing there. we know what happened with iraqi freedom. you're looking at a nation that can go in, with a superb military capability, which her daughter is a part of, and it can make a lot of differences, but the problem you have is that you have a political situation where we cannot sustain a long- term deployment, 12-13 years in afghanistan over the long term. it has become america's longest war. economically, you look at how that works. the big problem that i have with the drawdown is perhaps related to what your saying -- you have to be very careful about what to tell the enemy. you have to have a negotiating position that gets you from the strength
. people in great distress either find religion or the courts. [laughter] that is okay. we need a road map. what we are really out lying is an ongoing mission. our ideal on both sides, because we are open to all and have a level playing field. the road maps, the clarity of language, and information flows to the ultimate consumers, it is ideal. i love the fact that at the beginning of the creation, there was the thought that information flow passivity in a certain way for a certain population. i love the fact there is one for seniors because information is channeled differently for different priorities in different times. it must reflect our diversity and the delivery of regulation. we are here for the seniors. i see so many coming to the court room see how important that is. >> i wanted to move on to discussing the short term. short-term credit ends up being a death trap for a lot of consumers in a harmful way. that brings us the issue of loans and we have seen the effects. i want to bring in dawn to the conversation. there you are. you have done a lot of work in texas around this issue. m
could basically only study law or medicine or religion. that was about all. thomas jefferson had a vision. he believed the american people needed a public place to learn the diversity of disciplines, studies of science and at space, 4, form a common philosophy. he built this university in the image of 20 called the illimitable freedom of the human mind. today those of you will study here and teach here along with the taxpayers contributors, and parents who believe in your potential, you are all investing in mr. jefferson's vision. think for a moment about what that means. why do you spend many days and the dollars it takes to earn an education here or anywhere? why did jefferson what this institution to remain public and accessible, not just to virginians but as a destination from everywhere? i know that he was not thinking just about your getting a degree and a job. it was about something more. jefferson believed we could not be a strong country without investing in the kind of education that empowers us to be good citizens. that is why founding this university is among the few
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)